Do rates of litter decomposition tell us anything we really need to know?

Abstract

Results of several long-term studies of non-woody litter decomposition in forests indicate that we need to rethink why and how we measure rates of litter decomposition. Effects on litter decomposition rates were postulated to explain some of the nutritional effects of factors such as tree species, forest harvesting and fertilization. However, the accumulated experimental evidence indicates that litter decomposition rates do not mediate these responses. Many studies have reported litter mass loss becoming extremely slow at values considerably below 100%, indicating that early decay rates may not accurately foreshadow the entire decay process. Exclusion of soil faunal activities from current measurements of decomposition rates seriously reduces the likelihood that we are properly modeling decomposition. Finally, the use of regression and correlation analyses to determine which climate or initial litter quality factors control decay rate has led to many unwarranted and potentially misleading conclusions. These concerns are illustrated with examples from a suite of litter decomposition studies in British Columbia, Canada. Insights into nutrient cycling and carbon storage in ecosystems are more likely to arise from measuring the mass and nutrient content of annual litter input and determining the maximum decomposition limit and nutrient content at that stage, than by measuring early rates of decay. Improved predictions of relative decay rates of plant litters are likely to arise from a holistic approach based on plant life attributes rather than correlations based on individual initial litter chemistry parameters. Finally, a better understanding of the fate of faecal material of soil fauna is necessary before we can accurately predict and model litter decomposition.